Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T02:40:58.244Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Glucose metabolism in vivo in fed and 48 h starved goats during pregnacy and lactation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 July 2007

N. Chaiyabutr ,
Anne Faulkner  and
M. Peaker
N. Chaiyabutr
Affiliation:
Hannah Research Institute, Ayr KA6 5HL, Scotland
Anne Faulkner
Affiliation:
Hannah Research Institute, Ayr KA6 5HL, Scotland
M. Peaker
Affiliation:
Hannah Research Institute, Ayr KA6 5HL, Scotland
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. Glucose turnover (i.e. glucose entry and utilization rates) in fed and 48 h starved goats during pregnancy and lactation was determined using a continuous infusion of [U-14C]- and [3-3H]glucose.

2. Glucose synthesis and utilization increased during pregnancy and lactation in fed but not in starved goats.

3. Recycling of giucosc-C was approximately 10% in fed animals and 15–20% in starved animals and was unaffected by the stage of pregnancy or lactation.

4. Plasma glucose concentrations were maintained during pregnancy and lactation in fed goats but decreased during 48 h starvation in pregnant goats. Little change was seen in the plasma concentration of lipids and their metabolites during pregnancy and lactation in fed goats, but increases were observed after 48 h starvation.

5. The control of glucose metabolism in ruminants during pregnancy and lactation is discussed.

Type
Paper on General Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 47 , Issue 1 , January 1982 , pp. 87 - 94
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1982

References

Annison, E. F. & Linzell, J. L. (1964). J. Physiol., Lond. 175, 372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baird, G. D., Lomax, M. A., Symonds, H. W. & Shaw, S. R. (1980). Biochem. J. 186, 47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartley, J. C. & Black, A. L. (1966). J. Nutr. 89, 317.Google Scholar
Bergman, E. N. (1973). Cornell Vet. 63, 341.Google Scholar
Flint, D. J., Sinnett-Smith, P. A., Clegg, R. A. & Vernon, R. G. (1979). Biochem. J. 182, 421.Google Scholar
Garland, P. B. & Randle, P. J. (1962). Nature, Lond. 196, 987.Google Scholar
Jones, G. B. (1965). Analyt. Biochem. 12, 249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Judson, G. J. & Leng, R. A. (1972). Aust. J. biol. Sci. 25, 1313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katz, J. & Rognstad, R. (1976). Curr. Topics Cell Regul. 10, 237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katz, J., Rostami, H. & Dunn, A. (1974). Biochem. J. 142, 161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindsay, D. B. (1971). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 30, 272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindsay, D. B. (1973). In Production Diseases in Farm Animals, p. 107 [Payne, J. M., Hibbitt, K. G. and Sansom, B. F., editors]. London: Bailliere Tindall.Google Scholar
Linn, C. H. & Fritz, I. B. (1972). Can. J. Biochem. 50, 963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linzell, J. L. (1960). J. Physiol., Lond. 153, 481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slein, M. W. (1963). In Methods of Enzymatic Analysis, p. 117 [Bergmeyer, H. U., editor]. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Steel, J. W. & Leng, R. A. (1968). Proc. Aust. Soc. Anim. Prod. 7, 343.Google Scholar
Thompson, G. E. & Thomson, E. M. (1977). J. Physiol., Lond. 272, 187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, E. M., Snoswell, A. M., Clarke, P. L. & Thompson, G. E. (1979). Q. Jl exp. Physiol. 64, 7.Google Scholar
Van Slyke, D. D. & Folch, J. (1940). J. biol. Chem. 136, 509.Google Scholar
Williamson, D. H., Mellanby, J. & Krebs, H. A. (1962). Biochem. J. 82, 90.Google Scholar